Explanation #1: Rashi translates this as 'to leave it (in one's mouth)'.

Question: In that case, why does the Gemara not make a distinction on itself, and say 'Why does it speak specifically through Anigron, even oil on its own ought to be permitted if one swallows it immediately, seeing as it is only forbidden through Ir'ur - leaving it in one's mouth?

Explanation #2: The Ri therefore explains 'Lo Ye'ar'er to mean even if one swallows it without first leaving it in one's mouth, since all drinking for a cure is called 'Ir'ur', even if one swallows it.

Explanation #2 (cont.): And the reason that it is forbidden is because it is evident that one's intention is for a cure.

Establishing Explanation #1: Alternatively, one can resolve Rashi's explanation by explaining 'Lo Ye'ar'enu Lehash'hoso', but one may place it in Anigron, even if one leaves it in one's mouth.

Establishing Explanation #1 (cont.): And 'u'Bol'o' then means, not 'and he swallows it', but) 'or he swallows it' - as it is, without leaving it in the mouth.

Halachah: It therefore seems that if someone drinks a beverage as a cure, in the event that it is unpleasant to drink, and from which he therefore derives no benefit, it does not require a B'rachah ...

Halachah (cont.): Whereas if he does derive benefit from it (other than the cure), it requires a B'rachah.

Rejection of Text: Until the word 'Kimcha' does not belong in the text of Tosfos, since it is the wording of the Halachos Gedolos.

Clarification: It seems that this does not refer to actual flour ...

Reason: because if it did, the B'rachah of 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah' would be inappropriate.

Conclusion: It must therefore refer to flour that is called 'Ishkaltir', or to flour that one makes from oats that have been dried in the oven (See Maharsha).

Halachah: The Gemara holds like Shmuel.

Inference: Consequently, over those vine-branches for which people do not tend plant to plant the vines, one recites 'she'Hakol Nih'yah bi'Devaro'.

Inference (cont.): Likewise, those almonds that, when soft, one eats together with the outer peel, for which they were not originally planted, only to eat them with their pits when they ripen, one also recites 'she'Hakol ... '.'

Conclusion: Since they are fruit.

Inference: From here we can extrapolate that on cherry-pits, on peach apple-pits, in fact, on the pits of all fruit, one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz'.

Question: Even if it would not be Shevi'is, why is it not forbidden on account of the Pasuk in Devarim (20) "Do not destroy its trees"?

Answer #1: It speaks for example, where the tree produces less than a Kav, in which case "Lo Sachchis" does not apply, as we learned in Perek Lo Yachpor (Bava Basra 26.).

Answer #2: Alternatively, it speaks where its value for manufacturing beams exceeds the value of its fruit, where once again, "Lo Sachchis" does not apply ...

Conclusion: Whereas the Isur of Shevi'is "le'Ochlah", 've'Lo li'Sechorah ve'Lo le'Hefsed' does.

Conclusion: Less than that is not considered a fruit.

Inference: From here we can learn that on partially-ripe fruit that is smaller than a bean one does not recite 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz', but 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah'.

Clarification: Rabeinu Meir used to say that the reason that with regard to Orlah, it is not considered fruit, is only due to the principle that 'The Halachah in Chutz la'Aretz is like the one who is lenient in Eretz Yisrael'.

Clarification (cont.): But in Eretz Yisrael, it is definitely considered a fruit, over which one therefore recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz' ...

Conclusion: And as far as B'rachos is concerned, there is no difference between Eretz Yisrael and Chutz la'Aretz.

Clarification: For example what is called, 'Lituariv' in French (electuary a kind of cure) - one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah' ...

Clarification (cont.): But when it is dry, one does not recite a B'rachah at all.

Halachah: And the same applies to ginger, and to 'Mismar shel G'rupli', which one tends to eat when it is moist (like one does 'Li'uriv'), does not therefore require a B'rachah when it is dry.

Halachah (cont.): Over cinnamon-wood, on the other hand, which is called 'Kanil', .one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Adamah', seeing as one tends to eat it dry ...

Halachah (cont.): And because it grows on the ground like sugar-canes.

Halachah (cont.): Over sugar (honey from the sugar-cane) one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz', since the Pasuk in Shir h'Shirim (5) states "Ya'ari im Divshi" refers to sugar.

Halachah (cont.): And over muscat-nuts one recites 'Borei P'ri ha'Eitz', since it too, one tends to eat when it is dry.

Halachah: Likewise, Kleiritz (in French), that one makes from flour and either water or milk, one recites over it 'Borei Miynei Mezonos'.

Halachah (cont.): And so too, when one adds flour to beans, lentils or leek, or to almonds that one prepares for a sick person - requires 'Borei Miynei Mezonos provided it is added to satisfy ...

Halachah (cont.): But if it is added merely to thicken the food, then it is not necessary (See Gilyon ha'Shas) to recite Borei Miynei Mezonos'.

Conclusion: It is best however, to be strict and to eat the dish as part of the meal after having recited 'ha'Motzi', in which case one is exempt from a B'rachah anyway (See Gilyon ha'Shas).